Jim McGovern

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Judy Chu) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Bass) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Frankel) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to the attention of my colleagues a new report about the perilous reality facing the daily lives of the Rohingya Muslim minority in Burma, also known as Myanmar. The report, The Rohingya Crisis and the Risk of Atrocities in Myanmar: An ASEAN Challenge and Call to Action, was published by the ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights and describes the continuing persecution of the Rohingya in Burma. Along with my friend and colleague, Congressman Joe Pitts, in our positions as the Co-Chairs of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, we sent a letter to the Chairman of the ASEAN parliamentarians for Human Rights, the Honorable Malaysian Member of Parliament Charles Santiago, expressing how we share their concerns regarding the continuing human rights abuses perpetrated against the Rohingya people of Burma. Last year, the 113th Congress passed H. Res. 418, ``urging the Government of Burma to end the persecution of the Rohingya people and to respect internationally recognized human rights for all ethnic and religious minority groups within Burma.'' Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the letter to Chairman Santiago, the press release from the ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights describing their report, and the Executive Summary and Call to Action of the report. I urge all my colleagues to review this report and continue to advocate on behalf of the human rights and basic human dignity of the Rohingya people of Burma. Tom Lantos, Human Rights Commission, April 21, 2015. Hon. Charles Santiago, Member of Parliament, Malaysia, Chairman, ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Dear Chairman Santiago: As Co-Chairs of Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission of the United States Congress, we are writing to congratulate you on the release of your report, ``The Rohingya Crisis and the Risk of Atrocities in Myanmar''. We share your concerns with the situation in Burma (Myanmar) and appreciate the initiative of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights to shed light on these disturbing developments and call for action to address them. We are eager to review the report and bring it to the attention of the U.S. Congress and the American people by sharing it with our colleagues and formally entering it into the Congressional Record. The Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission shares your vision of standing up for abuses of human rights wherever they may occur. We have held hearings and briefings in the U.S. Congress and have worked closely with civil society organizations to bring further attention to the particularly egregious abuses against minorities by the Government of Burma. Last year, we introduced and passed a Congressional Resolution, H. Res. 418 ``Urging the Government of Burma to end the persecution of the Rohingya people and respect internationally recognized human rights for all ethnic and religious minority groups within Burma.'' We appreciate your leadership on this important issue and your commitment to advancing human rights within ASEAN. We would be pleased to work with you and other elected officials who are committed to the advancement of human rights to address the escalating human rights crisis facing the Rohingya in Burma. Sincerely, James P. McGovern, Member of Congress, Co-Chair TLHRC. Joseph R. Pitts, Member of Congress, Co-Chair TLHRC.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim the balance of the time I yielded back.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I don't think we have any other speakers here. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment that I would like to offer in the Record, along with extraneous materials, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. McGOVERN. Again, I will remind my colleagues that if we could defeat the previous question, we will bring up the Paycheck Fairness Act. It has been somewhat of a puzzlement to me that it has been so difficult, in this Republican-controlled House, to bring up legislation that would outlaw and end discrimination against women, and that is what this is. When a woman is working at the same job a man is and getting paid less for that same work, that is discrimination, and there is no way around that fact. And we have the opportunity, in this House, and in the Senate, to end it. But yet we can't get this bill to the floor for the kind of up-or- down, clean vote that we have been looking for for now quite a long time. As I mentioned, Mr. Speaker, this is not just a women's issue; it is a family issue. We are all talking about how this economy is not recovering as fast as we would like it to. We all like to talk about how we wish that people would earn a little bit more in their paychecks. Well, here is one way to do it. Make sure women get paid what they deserve, what they have earned. This should not be a controversial issue. This should not be something that requires that we can't get a vote on the floor. So we are now kind of relying on this procedural motion, by defeating the previous question, to try to at least get a debate on this and to try to get at least some people on record as saying we ought to have an up-or-down vote on this. As far as the underlying bill is concerned, Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill that we are considering here today, again, I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule because it is a closed rule, and they are two bills that would undermine the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation. Let me remind my colleagues why we have the Dodd-Frank legislation to begin with, and that is because we saw what the excesses of some in the financial industry had done. Our economy almost was ruined because of those excesses, and consumer rights were routinely trampled on. So we passed, in my opinion, a moderate and sensible kind of check on some of these financial institutions--that is the Dodd-Frank legislation. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and again, it is a puzzlement to me, have spent almost every waking moment that they have trying to undo that, trying to take away protections for consumers, trying to take away protections for small businesses, for homeowners. It doesn't make any sense. It doesn't make any sense at all. So, Mr. Speaker, again I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question, and I would urge them to vote ``no'' on this closed rule. Again, just to make this point crystal clear, the Equal Pay Act that we are talking about is nothing more than an attempt to end what continues to be a discriminatory practice in the United States. Nobody should be defending a practice that allows women to get paid less than men for doing the same job. That is discrimination, pure and simple, and we ought to bring that to an end. So I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and ``no'' on the rule. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), my distinguished colleague on the Rules Committee.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee, Mr. Sessions, for the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago, before we left for our district work period, this House worked in a responsible and bipartisan way to permanently fix the sustainable growth rate formula. Unfortunately, we return to the floor this week with legislation intended to further undermine the Dodd-Frank financial reform law and give huge tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans by repealing the estate tax without even finding an offset, thereby increasing our deficit. What we should be doing today, Mr. Speaker, is considering legislation to strengthen financial protection for consumers, create jobs, and ensure the continuation of our economic recovery; or, in honor of Equal Pay Day, we should debate and vote on the Paycheck Fairness Act to ensure that women get paid for equal work. A full-time working woman still earns significantly less than what a man earns for comparable work. It turns out that women earn nearly 25 cents less than a man for doing the same work. Achieving equal pay for women should be the top of our priority list, but, unfortunately, this Republican majority has denied us a vote on this critical issue. Today, instead, we will consider two pieces of legislation under a closed process to roll back important Dodd-Frank consumer protections. H.R. 650, the Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act, strips from manufactured homeowners critical protections enacted by Congress as part of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law. Manufactured homes are an important affordable housing option for many low- and moderate-income families, especially families living in rural areas. It is critical that these homeowners are able to have access to the same consumer protections afforded to consumers with traditional mortgages. H.R. 685, the Mortgage Choice Act, would allow mortgages with higher fees to improperly qualify for the qualified mortgage standards established by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. By removing affiliated title insurance fees from the 3 percent cap established by the CFPB, creditors could be incentivized to direct borrowers to expensive affiliates. Passage of this legislation could ultimately drive up the cost of mortgages, limit competition in the marketplace, and undo borrower protections. A coalition of civil rights organizations, including the Center for Responsible Lending, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the NAACP, and I could go on and on and on, has urged the House to reject these bills, as they ``could trigger the return of predatory lending, irresponsible underwriting, excessive fees, and the lax regulatory environment that sparked the housing crisis.'' Now, Mr. Speaker, I know that my friends in the majority don't like the Dodd-Frank financial reform law. They have made countless attempts to overturn the commonsense provisions contained in the law that protect consumers and work to prevent another financial crisis. But I don't think anybody in this House should want to set the stage for another financial crisis, and I have serious concerns about the process being used by the majority to repeal Dodd-Frank. My friend, the ranking member on the Financial Services Committee, Maxine Waters, has worked in good faith with the majority on legislation to make technical corrections to Dodd-Frank and other bipartisan updates. In fact, just yesterday, this House passed several pieces of legislation from the Financial Services Committee with overwhelming support from both sides of the aisle. But the two bills that we are considering today fall far short of that goal. Mr. Speaker, after the passage of a clean Homeland Security bill and the SGR fix, I had hoped that bipartisan cooperation in legislating would be contagious. I was wrong. Today, the Republicans are back to their old ways of bringing up ``my way or the highway bills'' that will be brought to the floor under a closed rule and then vetoed by the President. I urge my colleagues to defeat this rule and the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. I do.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In honor of Equal Pay Day, if we defeat the previous question, which I will ask Members to vote ``no'' on, we will offer an amendment to the rule that will allow the House to consider the Paycheck Fairness Act. In this day and age, it is an outrage that women in the United States still make less compared to men for the same work. This bill will help close that pay gap, empower women, and ensure that they get the respect and the compensation that they deserve. When we talk about paycheck fairness, Mr. Speaker, we also should remember that this is not just a women's issue; it is a family issue. Families increasingly rely on women's wages to make ends meet, and with less take-home pay, women have less for the everyday needs of their families, from groceries to rent to child care to doctors' visits. This is discrimination that exists in the United States of America, and we in this Chamber have an opportunity to end it. We cannot get the Republicans in this House to allow us to have an up-or-down, clean vote on this, so this is the only means available to us. At least have a debate on the Paycheck Fairness Act. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark).

Mr. McGOVERN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McGOVERN. I wonder if the gentleman would be kind enough to allow me to reclaim the balance of my time because I had yielded back, and two of our speakers have just shown up.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, let me, first of all, thank the chairman of the Rules Committee for his courtesy and generosity in allowing two of my colleagues who feel very strongly about these issues to have an opportunity to speak. I am very, very grateful. So, as a reward, I am not going to say anything else other than to urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and vote ``no'' on the rule. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Aguilar).

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield myself the balance of my time, and I will take this opportunity to close my side of the debate, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking all of those who have been involved in this compromise, especially Speaker Boehner and Leader Pelosi. I want to thank Mr. Burgess. I want to thank all of the members of the Energy and Commerce Committee. I am grateful to the staffs of all of the relevant committees for all of the work that they have put into this. I especially want to acknowledge the incredible work of the staff who works in the Office of Legislative Counsel. They don't always get thanked, but they do so much of the work around here, not only on important and complicated legislation like what we are debating here today, but on all legislation, so we are grateful to them. I don't really know what else to say here except that I am happy we are doing something, and I am happy that we are actually putting forward a bill, a bipartisan bill, that will help a lot of the people who most need help. As Mr. Burgess said, in reality, this bill is about access, making sure our senior citizens have the access to the doctors and to the health care that they want. We are making that possible through this bill, as well as helping countless children and low-income families and supporting our community health centers. This has been kind of an incredible week. It is hard to believe. First, we read that Ted Cruz signs up for ObamaCare, and now, we have this bipartisan compromise on the doc fix, and it reauthorizes CHIP and provides money to our community health centers. Who knows. I mean, if this is contagious, maybe next week, we will deal with climate change, so I am feeling good as we close this week. Again, I hope this is a coming attraction of what we can see in the future: more bipartisan cooperation, more give and take. If we follow what we did here, we actually can accomplish a lot more for the American people, and I think that would be a good thing. Let's get this done. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, as I said, it is not a perfect bill, but it represents, I think, a major accomplishment. If I could inquire of the gentleman as to how many additional speakers he has.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I include the following statements for the Record in support of H.R. 2: the statement by the Massachusetts Hospital Association, a statement by the Massachusetts Medical Society, a list of a number of groups in support of H.R. 2, statements by the American Hospital Association, SEIU, and others. They are all in support of this bill. Massachusetts Hospital Association (MHA) Statement on H.R. 2 March 25, 2015 The Massachusetts Hospital Association gives its full support to H.R. 2, the U.S. House bipartisan package to permanently repeal the Medicare physician Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR). We are especially relieved because there have been 17 short-term SGR fixes over the past few years, nearly all of which included significant reimbursement cuts to hospitals and other providers for nothing more than a couple-month band aid. This bill draws these short term patches to an end. We are relieved that Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) funding, community health center funding, and a continued delay to enforcement of the two-midnight rule are included. We support the bill not only for what it does, but also for what it does not do; it rejects cuts to graduate medical education, Medicare bad debt, site neutral cuts to hospital outpatient departments and inpatient rehabilitation facilities, and it does not include unsound and inequitable area wage index and rural floor policies. Obviously, we would prefer not to be part of the offsets to help pay for the package, but we are realistic and especially so because we realize that if this deal falls through and Congress must consider another one-year SGR delay, then these cuts to providers will still be in play to pay for a meaningless, additional one-year delay. We strongly prefer a permanent SGR fix and therefore give our full support to this bill. Most importantly, we thank our congressional delegation for their efforts on behalf of hospitals. Given the political environment that has been a barrier to collaboration on major legislation, this bill represents an exceptional accomplishment that benefits hospitals, physicians, other providers, and most notably, the long term health of the Medicare program.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Bera).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.